Wang Q.E. Inventing China Through History: The May Fourth Approach to Historiography
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
115. According to the Senate House Records of University of London, Fu
was a registered student in the Psychology Department from October 1920
to July 1923. In 1922, he obtained his BA degree and was admitted in the
MA program of the Department, but Fu did not finish the graduate
program.
116. In his letter to Hu Shi from England, Fu mentioned his English
professors. He thought Spearman was a bit bookish. He was instead
attracted to the fame of George Hicks and L. T. Hobhouse, two prominent
philosophers in the school. It seems that he could not totally eliminate his
interest in the humanities. Hu Shi laiwang shuxin xuan, vol. 1, 107.
117. Luo Jialun, “Yuanqi linli de Fu Mengzhen,” Shizhe rusi ji, 172–173.
118. “Wo dui shao bona de kanfa” (I see Bernard Shaw), Fu Sinian
quanji, vol. 7, 32–42.
119. The reason is unknown, but possibly economic. Because of the 1924
inflation, the German mark fell rapidly against the Chinese yuan, and
many Chinese students went to Berlin to live on the high exchange rate.
Fu’s going to Germany gave him an opportunity to meet his Beida friends.
Cf. Y. C. Wang, 165. In Fu’s letters to Luo Jialun, discovered and published
by Luo’s daughter Luo Jiufang, he often joked about their poor student
lives. See Dangdai (Contemporary), 127 (March 1, 1998), 104–119. But it
is also possible that he was not so successful in pursuing the degree in
psychology. See Wang Fansen, Fu Ssu-nien, 84–85.
120. Mao Zishui, Shiyou ji, 90.
121. Luo Jialun, “Yuanqi linli de Fu Mengzhen,” Shizhe rusi ji, 173.
122. Luo Jialun later told a story about Fu’s stay in Germany. One day
they gathered together in a Chinese restaurant in Berlin, Fu brought a
thick three-volume geology book to the party. His friends kidded about his
science fetish. Ibid., 175. Although ambitious, Fu’s student life in Berlin
was not very successful. Lacking a focus, he actually, according to the
registration record at Berlin University, failed three courses: Sanskrit,
Sanskrit grammar, and astrology.
123. “Yu Gu Jiegang lun gushishu,” Zhongshan daxue zhoukan (Weekly
Journal of Sun Yat-sen University), ed. The Institute of History and
Philology, II:13, 14 (Jan. 1928), 359–398. Also, Fu Sinian quanji, vol. 4,
454–494. About Fu’s impression of Gu’s paper, vol. 3, 225.
124. See Wang Fansen, Fu Ssu-nien, 96–97, note 209.
125. Fu admitted that because his scientific excitement came after his
extensive exposure to classical learning, it was thus not effective. It only
served as a kind of mind-training. Fu Sinian quanji, vol. 7, 17–27.
126. In his library, there were works of Leopold von Ranke, Georg Hegel,
Heinrich Treitschke, and other German scholars. “Fu Sinian dangan”
(Fu Sinian’s archive), I-817.
238 NOTES
127. Fu mentioned Ranke and Mommsen in his forward to the Shiliao
yu shixue (Historical sources and history). He also praised Sima Guang’s
historical method. Fu Sinian quanji, vol. 4, 354–356.
128. Zhu Jiahua, a GMD veteran and a student returned from Germany,
recalled that when he was then the vice-president of the university, he tried
to look for a modern scholar to head the School of Humanities. He chose Fu
for his new approach to Chinese tradition. “Dao wangyou Fu Mengzhen
xiansheng” (In memory of my friend Fu Sinian), in Fu Lecheng, Fu
Mengzhen, 23.
129. His student recalled that Fu taught five courses at the university:
Shujing (Book of history), ancient Chinese literature, psychology and
others. See Zhong Gongxun “Mengzhen xiansheng zai Zhongshan Daxue
shiqi de yidian buchong” (Some supplement materials about Fu Sinian
when he was at Sun Yat-sen University), Zhuanji wenxue, 28:3 (1976), 51.
130. See Fu Sinian quanji, vol. 7, 96–101.
131. See Schwarcz The Chinese Enlightenment, passim and Tse-tsung
The May Fourth Movement.
132. In his assessment of Hu Shi’s position in modern Chinese history,
Yu Ying-shi has argued that Hu is more relevant today for his commitment
to liberalism than his scholarly work. Zhongguo jindai sixiangshi shang de
Hu Shi (Hu Shi’s position in modern Chinese intellectual history) (Taipei:
Lianjing chuban shiye gongsi, 1986).
133. Zhang Binsheng, “Yao Congwu xiansheng zhuan” (Biography of Yao
Congwu), Yao Congwu, 1.
134. Zhao Tiehan, “Daonian yige chunchui de xueren” (In memory of a
pure scholar), Yao Congwu xiansheng aisilu (Memories for Yao Congwu)
(Taipei, 1971), 134–136. Another memoir complains that the media in
Taiwan did not pay sufficient attention to Yao’s death, because Yao was a
scholar, not a popular singer. Peng Ge, “Xueren yu mingxing zhi si” (The
death of a scholar and the death of a pop singer), 132–133.
135. Mao Zishui, “Daonian Yao Congwu xiansheng” (In memory of Yao
Congwu), Yao Congwu xiansheng aisilu, 51.
136. Wang Deyi, Yao Congwu xiansheng nianbiao (Chronology of Yao
Congwu), Yaoshi Congwu xiansheng jinian lunwenji (Commemorative
volume for Yao Congwu), ed. History Department, Taiwan University
(Taipei, 1971), 5.
137. Ibid., 7–8. Huntington was a geography professor at Yale. This was
Yao’s first attempt to work with a foreign language. He acknowledged some
mistakes in his endnotes.
138. In the 1920s, Yao wrote a series of articles exploring the geo-
graphical influence on human history: “Cong lishi guannian guancha dili
bianqian yu rensheng zhi guanxi” (The relationship between the changing
geography and human life, a historical perspective), Dixue zazhi (Journal
NOTES 239
of Geography), 11:5, 6 (1920), “Dili yu wenhua” (Geography and culture),
ibid., 11:11 (1920), “Wenming yu qihou” (Civilization and climate), ibid.,
13:1 (1922), “Hewei dili huanjing, dili huanjing yu renlei shenghuo you-
ruohe zhi guanxi” (What is geographical environment? What is the rela-
tionship between geographical environment and human life?), ibid., 13:3
(1922).
139. There are different opinions about how many years Yao studied in
Germany. One is in his daughter’s memoir which states that his father went
to Germany in 1922 and returned to China in 1934. See Yao Ta-liang’s “My
Father—Tsung-wu Yao,” Yao Congwu xiansheng aisilu, 14–15. Yao’s biog-
rapher and his life long friend Zhang Binsheng agrees that Yao returned to
China in 1934, but Zhang says that Yao went to Germany in 1923. See
Zhang’s “Yao Congwu xiansheng zhuan,” Yao Congwu, 1. A few memoirs
written by Yao’s friends and colleagues recall that Yao returned to China in
1931. See Tao Xisheng’s “Yao Congwu xiansheng lei” (Recollection of Yao
Congwu), Yao Congwu xiansheng aisilu, 14–15, 98. I accept Zhang’s opinion
because I also checked these dates with Wang Deyi’s Yao Congwu xiansheng
nianbiao, which matches Zhang’s finding. I do not think Yao went to
Germany in 1922 for he, according to Mao Zishui’s memoir, passed the
examination in that fall, and according to Wang Deyi, Yao spent some days
at home after passing the examination. Yao actually sailed to Germany on
January 5, 1923, and arrived in February. See Yao Congwu xiansheng nian-
biao, Yao Congwu xiansheng jinian lunwenji, 9–10. As for the date of his
return, I believe his daughter’s memory is more reliable.
140. Yu Dawei, Yao’s friend in Germany, recalled that to have a degree
from European countries was honorable at the time. There was a saying:
“A doctorate from Japan coats you with silver, a doctorate from Europe
coats you with gold.” Quoted in Hsi-Huey Liang, The Sino-German Con-
nection: Alexander von Falkenhausen between China and Germany, 1900–
41 (Amsterdam: Van Gorcum, Assen, 1978), 26.
141. See Max Linde, “Chinese Students in Germany,” Ostasiatische
Rundschau, 7:11 (1926), 234–235; and Y. C. Wang, Chinese Intellectuals and
the West, 165. For general information about Chinese students in Berlin in
the early twentieth century, see Hsi-Huey Liang, 23–38. About Luo Jialun’s
sojourn in Germany, see his daughter’s memoir, “Zhuinian wode fuqing”
(In memory of my father), in Luo Zhixi xiansheng zhuanji ji zhusu ziliao
(Biography of Luo Jialun and his writings) (Taipei, 1969), 30.
142. In his introduction Hu probably made a mistake. He said that Yao
stayed in Germany for seven years; but it was actually eleven years. See
Tao Xisheng, “Yao Congwu xiansheng lei,” in Yao Congwu xiansheng aisilu,
98. Of course, it is also possible that it was Tao, instead of Hu, who made
the mistake. Tao explains that at that time, his and other’s reverence for
Yao is because, on the one hand, not many people have stayed abroad as
long as Yao, on the other hand, many students at the time regarded Euro-
pean scholarship as superior to American scholarship.
240 NOTES
143. For a brief introduction to their careers, see sections of Mechthild
Leutner’s “Sinologie in Berlin,” Berlin und China: Dreihundert Jahre
wechselvolle Beziehungen, ed. Kuo Heng-yu (Berlin: Colloquium Verlag,
1987), 44–46, 49–52.
144. My description of Otto Franke’s career is largely based on Yao
Congwu’s own work, “Guoshi kuoda mianyan de yidian kanfa” (My opinion
of the evolution of national history), in which he recalls his German pro-
fessors. Yao Congwu, 237–239. The following discussions are based on the
same source.
145. Though different from Ranke in understanding history, Johann
Droysen was a faithful student of Ranke’s concept of historical sources. His
verstehen approach to history addressed the problem of whether human
cognition was able to reach an objective knowledge, but in general, Droysen
did not refute the ideal of objectivity. Rather, he wanted to attain it with
speculation. Cf. Georg Iggers, German Conception of History, 109–115.
Wilhelm Wattenbach was known for his work on German historical sources.
His achievement in history lay in his editorship of the Monumenta
Germaniae Historica.
146. See Du Weiyun, “Yao Congwu shi yu lishi fangfalun” (Professor Yao
Congwu and historical methodology). Du also recalls that Yao suggested
that they teach the course together in the 1960s. Yao Congwu xiansheng
aisilu, 84–85.
147. Yao Congwu, “Guoshi kuodai mianyan de yidian kanfa,” Yao
Congwu, 231–258.
148. Yao and Haenisch kept contact after Yao returned to China. In a
letter written by Yao to Fu Sinian, he mentioned that Haenisch would like
him to recommend someone to teach Chinese at Berlin University. Yao
thought of Fu Lehuan, Fu Sinian’s nephew. See “Fu Sinian dangan” (Fu
Sinian’s archive), II-345.
149. Wang Deyi, Yao Congwu xiansheng nianbiao, Yao Congwu xian-
sheng jinian lunwenji, 11.
150. Meng-ta Pei-lu und Hei-ta Shih-lueh, Chinesische Gesandten-
berichte uber die fruehen Mongolen 1221 und 1237, nach Vorarbeiten von
Erich Haenisch und Yao Tsung-wu, ubsersetzt und kommentiert von Peter
Olbricht und Elisabeth Pinks (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1980). The
translators write that Yao translated a part of the two books in the 1930s,
see xvii.
151. “Zhongguo zaozhishu shuru ouzhou kao” (A critical study of the
transmission of Chinese paper-making technology to Europe), Furen xuezhi
(Journal of Furen University), I:1 (1928). It was republished for the last
time in the fall of 1966 in Shumu jikan (A Quarterly Journal of Bibliogra-
phy), I:2 (1966).
NOTES 241
152. See Yao’s own note to the work when it was reprinted in Shumu
jikan, I:3 (1966).
153. Wang Deyi, Yao Congwu xiansheng nianbiao, Yao Congwu xian-
sheng jinian lunwenji, 25.
154. As Lamprecht’s student, Breysig’s argument represented an effort
to interpret history from a positivist perspective. Corresponding to an inter-
national trend in modern European historiography, it was however not
the mainstay of German historiography at the beginning of the twentieth
century. Cf. Georg Iggers, “The Tragic Course of German Historiography:
The Political Function of Historical Scholarship in Germany in the nine-
teenth and twentieth Centuries,” German Life and Letters, 34:2 (Jan. 1981),
223–233. With Breysig, Yao studied the works of Vico, Hegel, Comte,
Buckle, and Burckhardt. For his recollection of Breysig, see Yao Congwu
xiansheng quanji (The complete works of Yao Congwu) (Taipei: Zhengzhong
Shuju, 1982), vol. 5, 221, note 1.
155. Yao Congwu, “Deguo fulangke jiaoshou dui zhongguo lishi zhi
gongxian” (German historian Franke’s contribution to the study of Chinese
history), Xin zhonghua (New China), 4:1 (1936).
156. Yao’s “Ouzhou xuezhe dui xiongnu de yanjiu” was first published
in Guoxue jikan (A Quarterly Journal of National Studies), at Beijing Uni-
versity, 2:3. It was revised and included in Dongbeishi luncong (Essays on
northeast Chinese history) (Taipei, 1955).
157. This information was given to me by Professor Herbert Franke in
his letter of February 19, 1995. Professor Franke is the professor emeritus
at the University of Munich who succeeded E. Haenisch.
158. Yang Yixiang, Yao’s student at the university and now a renowned
specialist in Chinese historiography, recalled recently that it was Yao’s
influence that he took the study of historiography as his specialty. See Ning
Bo, “Shixueshi yaniu de jin yu xi—fang Yang Yixiang xiansheng” (The past
and present in the study of historiography: an interview with Mr. Yang
Yixiang), Shixueshi yanjiu, 4 (1994), 10–15. Due to the Sino-Japanese War,
Yao’s lecture notes on German historical methodology failed to publish. But
he wrote extensively on the subject.
159. See Du’s “Yao Congwu shi yu lishi fangfalun” (Professor Yao
Congwu and historical methodology), Yao Congwu xiansheng aisilu, 81–85.
160. “Lishi fangfa daolun” (Introduction to historical methodology), Ya o
Congwu xiansheng quanji, vol. 1, 1.
161. Ibid., 8–9. Yao gave examples that in order to learn how to swim,
one had to jump into the water. Similarly, in order to learn historical
method, one had to do history.
162. Ibid., 9–12. Yao suggested that students read Chinese translations
of English historian E. H. Carr’s What Is history? and American writers
242 NOTES
Will and Ariel Durant’s The Lessons of History. As for Hegel, he later wrote
that Hegel’s statement encouraged historians to look for explanations for
historical events. See ibid., vol. 5, 121.
163. Ranke’s awareness of the difference between history and philoso-
phy is discussed in Leopold von Ranke, The Theory and Practice of History,
eds. Georg Iggers and Konrad von Moltke (Indianapolis, 1973), passim.
164. “Ouzhou lishi fangfalun de qiyuan” (The origins of European his-
torical methodology), Yao Congwu xiansheng quanji, vol. 1, 16–17. Although
published in 1970, it is possible that Yao wrote it for the methodology class
in the early years.
165. Ibid., 10–11.
166. “Shuo shiliao de jieshi” (On interpretations of historical sources),
ibid., 33.
167. Ibid., 34–37.
168. Ibid., 81–82, 37–45.
Chapter Four
1. For Ranke’s influence in the English-speaking world, see Georg
Iggers’s “The Image of Ranke in American and German Historical Thought.”
History and Theory, 2 (1962), 17–40.
2. Shils, “Intellectuals, Traditions, and the Traditions of Intellectuals,”
Intellectuals and Tradition, eds. Eisenstadt & Graubard, 27.
3. Levenson, “ ‘History’ and ‘Value’: The Tensions of Intellectual Choice
in Modern China,” 146–194.
4. Xu Guansan made such a comment in his Xinshixue jiushinian, vol.
1, xi.
5. Liang published his journey, entitled Ouyou xinying lu (Reflections on
my trip to Europe), Liang Rengong jinzhu (Liang Qichao’s recent works)
(Taipei: Wenhai chubanshe, 1922), vol. 1.
6. See Li Zongtong’s preface to Ershi shiji zhi kexue (Sciences in the
twentieth century), vol. 9, Shixue (history) (Taipei: Zhengzhong shuju),
quoted in Du Weiyun, “Xifang shixue shuru zhongguo kao” (A study of the
importation of Western history into China), Bulletin of the Department of
History, National Taiwan University, 3 (1976), 417.
7. Liang’s Zhongguo lishi yanjiufa (Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Chuban-
she, 1987) and its Bubian were both his lecture notes. He wrote them in
1922 and 1926–1927 respectively, when he was a history professor at
Qinghua University in Beijing.
NOTES 243
8. In his Ouyou xinyinglu, Liang described how Western intellectuals
had developed a sense of despair and pessimism after World War I and what
they hoped for China. See also Tang, Global Space 165–223.
9. Liang, Zhongguo lishi yanjiufa, 1.
10. Ibid., 6.
11. Ibid., 10–11.
12. See chapter 1. For Liu’s opinion about the royal historical institute,
see Shitong tongshi (Perspectives in historiography) (Shanghai: Guji
Chubanshe, 1983), “Shiguan jianzhi” (The Establishment of Historical
Officer), chapter 11, 303–327; “Bianzhi” Clarification of the Position),
chapter 10, 281–288; “Zixu” (Self-preface), chapter 10, 288–299; and
“Wushi” (Against the Fashion), chapter 20, 589–599. See also, Denis
Twitchett, The Writing of Official History under the T’ang.
13. Liang, Zhongguo lishi yanjiufa, 36–37.
14. Ibid., 87. In his “Yanjiu wenhuashi de jige zhongyao wenti—duiyu
jiuzhu zhongguo lishi yanjiufa zhi xiubu ji xiuzheng” (Some important
issues in the study of cultural history—revisions of my Method for the study
of Chinese history), he further confirmed that the scientific method was an
inductive method. Ibid., 137. Liang’s opinion was possibly influenced by his
friend Hu Shi, who published “Qingdai xuezhe de zhixue fangfa” (Qing
scholars’ methods in their study) in 1919, in which Hu praised Qing
scholars for their scientific methods in examining ancient histories. See
Hu Shi zhexue sixiang ziliao xuan, vol. 1, 184–208.
15. Liang, Zhongguo lishi yanjiufa, 39–39.
16. Charles Langlois and Charles Seignobos, Introduction to the Study
of History, trans. G. G. Berry (New York: Henry Holt & Company, 1926),
19–22. There were two possibilities for Liang to get to know this book. One
was through the help of the Chinese students in France whom he met. The
other was through the Japanese translation (the Chinese translation of
the book, incidentally, was not published until the 1930s). The Japanese
translated this book at the end of the nineteenth century. See Masayuki
Sato, “Historiographical Encounters: the Chinese and Western Traditions
in Turn-of-the-century Japan,” Storia della Storiografia/History of Historio-
graphy, 19 (1991), 17 note 14.
17. Zhongguo lishi yanjiufa, 41–42. Liang probably did not know
that although H. Bancroft’s wide coverage of records made his book valu-
able to some readers, American historians accused him of lacking a critical
examination of his sources. Cf. Barnes, A History of Historical Writing, 230,
237.
18. Liang, Zhongguo lishi yanjiufa, 67–68.
19. Hu Shi noticed Liang’s mistake in his diary Hu Shi de riji (Hu Shi’s
diary) (Hong Kong: Zhonghua shuju, 1985), vol. 3, 255.
244 NOTES
20. Liang, Zhongguo lishi yanjiufa, 69–73.
21. Ibid., 71–77.
22. Ibid., 77–94.
23. For example, in his Shitong, Liu Zhiji discussed historical distortion
(Qubi), in two chapters of the book. Instead of pointing out that careful
examination of the validity of sources was the way in which historians could
avoid distortion in their writings, Liu devoted his discussions to historians’
association with the royal court and believed that this kind of affiliation
adversely affected historical truth. See Shitong tongshi, chapters 24
and 25.
24. Ibid., 71–77. F. Hirth, The Ancient History of China to the End of
the Chou Dynasty (New York: Columbia University Press, 1908). Having
received historical training in Germany, Hirth often intended to meet
the German standard in his research. In his preface to the China and the
Roman Orient, Hirth declared that “I have endeavored to please the
German critic rather than the learned of any other country” (New York:
Paragon Book Reprint Corp. 1966), iii. This book was first published in
Shanghai in 1885 and included in Liang’s bibliography here. Liang’s
acquanitance with Hirth’s book was likely through Hu Shi, who was Hirth’s
student at Columbia.
25. Liang, Zhongguo lishi yanjiufa, 108–119.
26. Ibid., 120–136.
27. “Yanjiu wenhuashi de jige zhongyao wenti,” ibid, 138. It was however
also possible that Liang had read Rickert’s work before he wrote the Zhong-
guo lishi yanjiufa. But it seems that his “careful” reading of Rickert
occurred afterward.
28. Ibid., 138–140.
29. For a general yet concise discussion on German historicism, includ-
ing the work of Rickert, see Jörn Rüsen and Friedrich Jaeger, Geschichte
des Historismus (München, 1992).
30. Liang, Zhongguo lishi yanjiufa, 137–138.
31. Ibid., 141–143.
32. Tang, Global Space, 165–223.
33. Liang’s elaboration on biographical methods constitutes the main
part of the Zhongguo lishi yanjiufa bubian, 181–323.
34. Ibid., 156–171.
35. Ibid., 299–300.
36. Even after 1949 Liang’s two books were reprinted in different
versions. Cf. Wu Ze, ed. Zhongguo Jindai Shixueshi (Modern Chinese
historiography), vol. 1, 495–525; vol. 2, 114–131.
NOTES 245
37. P. Demiéville, “Chang Hsueh-cheng and His Historiography,” Histo-
rians in China and Japan, 167–185.
38. For Naito Konan’s study of Zhang Xuecheng, see Joshua Fogel’s
Politics and Sinology: The Case of Naito Konan (1866–1934) (Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1984), 154–156.
39. “Zhang Xuecheng shixue guankui,” in He Bingsong lunwenji,
89–119. Before this article, He had published a review article of Zhang’s
work—“Du Zhang Xuecheng Wenshi tongyi zhaji” (Reflections on Zhang’s
General Meanings of Literature and History)—in 1922. Ibid., 27–50. In his
introduction to Hu’s biography, he quoted Hu’s diary to describe Hu’s
“experiment” and related their common interest. See “Zengbu Zhang
Shizhai nianpu xu” (An introduction to the Chronological biography of
Zhang Xuecheng), ibid., 132–146.
40. “Zhang Xuecheng shixue guankui” (A study of Zhang Xuecheng’s
ideas of history), ibid., 91–93, 100–103.
41. Ibid., 107–112.
42. Ibid., 93–96.
43. Zhang, Wenshi tongyi, chapter 1.
44. “Zengbu Zhang Shizhai nianpu xu” (Preface to the expanded chrono-
logical biography of Zhang Xuecheng), He Bingsong lunwenji, 146. In his
work on the eastern Zhejiang School, he reiterated the importance of
introducing Western culture to China for creating a modern culture. See
Zhedong xuepai suyuan (Shanghai: Commercial Press, 1932), 14, 205.
45. He, “Lun suowei guoxue” (On the so-called national study), He
Bingsong lunwenji, 481–490.
46. He, “Tongshi xinyi zixu” (Self-preface to A New Perspective on
General History), He Bingsong jinian wenji, 1–12.
47. Ibid.
48. Ibid., 97–99, 108.
49. According to Leonard Krieger, the term scientific history means two
things: critical methods and the search for a lawful generalization. Both
these two kinds of the “scientific history” were introduced to the United
States from Europe but in the beginning, critical method were dominant.
The “New History” school appeared closer to the second kind and it was,
Krieger said, a result of the status quo of the study of European history
in the United States at the time. “European History in America,” History:
The Development of Historical Studies in the US, eds. John Higham et al.
(Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1968), 255–267.
50. He, “Lishi yanjiufa” (Historical methodology), He Bingsong lunwenji,
149.
246 NOTES
51. Ibid., 151.
52. Ibid., 152–153.
53. Ibid., 154–155.
54. Ibid., 147–148.
55. Ibid., 152–167. “Nibian zhongguo jiuji suoyin liyi” (A suggestion for
indexing historic books in China), ibid., 457–458.
56. See He’s preface to the book, Lishi Yanjiufa (Shanghai: Commercial
Press, 1927), 1–3. He’s records at University of Wisconsin/Madison shows
that he learned German at the time.
57. See He’s letter to Yao Mingda in 1925, entitled “Lun shixue” (On
history), He Bingsong lunwenji, 123–125.
58. See He’s preface to Lishi Yanjiufa.
59. Ibid.
60. Wen-hsin Yeh’s Provincial Passages: Culture, Space, and the Origins
of Chinese Communism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996)
has provided a detailed description of the Zhejiang No. 1 Normal School.
See chapter 4, 71–93.
61. It is still a mystery as to who actually did that. He’s friends recalled
that He might have known something afterward, but he dared not tell,
given the political pressure. But it was hardly possible that He had real
enemies, for he was indeed a gentle scholar all his life. It might just have
been an accident. About the poison case, see He’s “Yishi du’an zhi huigu”
(My recollection of the poison case at the No. 1 Normal College), Ruan
Yicheng, “Ji He Bingsong xiansheng” (About He Bingsong), He Bingsong
jinian wenji, 33–35, 260–269.
62. In the Commercial Press, He planned to publish a series of transla-
tions of Western historical works. His translations of Shotwell’s An Intro-
duction to History and History and Gooch’s History and Historians in the
Nineteenth Century represented his initial efforts. Although He was unable
to continue the plan, the press maintained this tradition of translating
Western works in today’s China. For He’s plan, see his “Xiyang shixueshi
yizhexu” (Translator’s preface to An Introduction to History and History)
(Shanghai: Commercial Press, 1929).
63. In the 1930s, He was an adjunct history professor at Daxia (Great
China) University and Guanghua University.
64. For English scholarship on the Zhedong School, see Lynn Struve,
“Chen Que versus Huang Zongxi: Confucian Faces Modern Times in the
seventeenth-century,” Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 18:1 (March 1991),
5–23 and “The Hsu Brothers and Semiofficial Patronage of Scholars in the
Kang-hsi Period,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 42:1 (June 1982),
231–266.
NOTES 247